skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
But that's the thing - not everyone does think less of such people, under the view that only people with privilege can even have the luxury of tuning out the impact of politics on their lives at work, since marginalized colleagues still suffer the impacts of politics daily at the office (or indirectly elsewhere in ways attributable to the actions and inactions of their employer) and they shouldn't be blamed for mixing politics and business when they speak up about it. I realize that's not your view, but it's a plenty common view.

Further, not everyone who wants to keep politics and business separate even agrees on what mixing politics and business means.

Is it politics for a company to go out of its way to make bathrooms explicitly gender-neutral, put pronouns in staff directories, encourage even people who are not trans to indicate their pronouns so that trans people don't feel singled out by doing so, discipline people for persistent or intentional use of the wrong pronouns in the workplace, and cover common trans needs like hormone replacement therapy in the company health insurance plan?

Many people on the right of the US political spectrum would call that politics. Many other people conclude that some good workers happen to be trans and would feel more comfortable working at such employers than at ones with traditional attitudes toward them, meaning that these changes have the apolitical good business consequence of maximizing the ability of the company to attract and retain workers.

Does one have to inquire into the motivation of the employer for adopting these policies to decide if they're mixing politics or business, or just engaging in business?

Lots of subjectivity even on moral rights questions like this.

Though, I will say that my use of the word "enforce" is really only applicable to legal rights, not moral rights, outside of some kind of dystopian enforcement of what people are allowed to think.
If the penalty is less than the potential fine as has sometimes been the case, is that really that big of a deterrent?
You might want to rethink yours. You are arguing for child labor with emotional manipulation (Some 14 year olds - children - will be sad to lose a job)

I realize that folks are different. However, In a lot of places and situations, child labor is illegal - and 14 is considered child labor in so many situations. When they do work, it comes with massive restrictions. This is soley because we, as a society, generally feel that the focus should be on school instead of work. If we cannot pay young folks on par with adults, we shouldn't hire them.

As a sidenote: I'm guessing that the real reason the school hired them is because they are cheap labor - soft exploitation - and so long as their rate is less than paying a member of the custodial staff (who would have to pick up the slack), they won't be out of a job.
You can directly route all your orders to an exchange, but HFT firms are active there as well, and they might even get paid for it by the exchange (which you have to pay much higher commissions than what retail traders are paying right now). All alternatives eventually end up reinventing what the HFT firms do.
Test is a small part of the whole picture. They might have lots of test but the system might still suck.
I am not familiar with the legal aspect, but technically this is definitely possible. You basically just need to rent a server in an exchange colo center, and buy software certified to submit trades / consume market data on that exchange. Then build your brokerage app on top of that "direct market access" software.
Um... no. Christians are Christians by choice. Those under a dictator have no choice.

Maybe use Singapore's 'benevolent dictator' as your example?
Heroku is a perfect example of simplicity in this area (devx/ux wise, putting aside proprietariness).

Why is it so hard to cover 90% of same ubuntus running same docker containers, communicating over same standard protocols?
Aren't we already discussing SEC violations here?
Every short seller is a buyer. That's why people keep buying the stock. There are more buyers than sellers.
Aah, i cant trust google services anymore, sadly. More so if critical.

I even treat my own gmail account with resignation these days.

My Picasa, my rss, my google chat.

Am i wrong to have never touched these cloud services?

I prefer dedicated servers even over AWS, too.

Edit: spellink

Edit2: people downvoting me to hell .. i have to defend my internet points a bit here ..

How should i treat these google services if not with this nihilism? Amazon isn't killing products.

Ill admit to liking kube, but mostly because its open source and “out there” where no one can kill it. Google publishing stuff thats 100% in its control sends a shiver down my long-term-service thinking. Add “Fleets” to it and i get a sense of dread at the thought.
For pointers to other vertices of this story graph, see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25933543.

As for this thread, it's got 1500+ comments. If you want to see them all you'll need to click through the More links at the bottom, or like this:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25941431&p=2

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25941431&p=3

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25941431&p=4

(Use your imagination after that.)
Citadel gets first dibs on trades from Robinhood users. If they want the trade they take it, otherwise they send it on to some place else.

Fidelity does this also and runs ads on TV that explain the trading process that are factually correct if not clear on why exactly the HFT is paying for order flow.

Basically the HFT is "making the market"; somebody wants to buy 5 shares of this stock, a moment later somebody wants to sell 6, the HFT is a buffer between all of those people. With exclusive order flow from Robinhood, Fidelity or somebody like that they have a big pool of liquidity if all of a sudden their trading strategy says they should buy or sell that.
The Great Crash Detective
The financial system has _many_ guard rails including licensure (see the FINRA exams), regulations and regulatory bodies, and orders to halt or limit trades and positions on volatile securities.

This concern is relevant to GME, BB, AMC, etc. because folks are joining Robinhood, Webull, and similar apps in record numbers in a rush to jump in on these hyped-up opportunity.
This is weasel crap, and pretending that separation is meaningful is one of the reasons people hate legalese smoke and mirrors. All it takes is someone near the top of the org to send some messages, and you don't have to be in the same room to do it. The financial world pretends this crap works because otherwise they'd be rightfully pilloried for exactly the kind of shit that is happening right now.
If the alternative is bankruptcy and the destruction of your legacy, would you risk it?
I'd love to see something like Uniswap for stocks. Essentially replacing the orderbook with an equation taking HFTs out of the equation and allowing regular users to make money providing liquidity.
Yeah, exactly. Back in the 90s-2000s, though, it was easier to deal with an office-based outsource hub that had its own line manager, etc, mostly because things were so damned slow to send back and forth that you wanted to chunk project coordination. Those were comparatively rarer in the US, since anywhere you could put one together had enough tech industry to make the costs there prohibitive.

Nowadays, you could just hire from the flyover states, find all the good techies that didn't make the pilgrimage to one of the traditional hotspots, and train them on the last bits on the job for not very much more money than an international team, when all costs are accounted.

It'll be interesting seeing the trajectory of tech salaries over the next however long though. That part didn't happen either but probably will now.

I can't imagine why someone would pay a Bay Area FAANG salary for any job that could be fulfilled at Arkansas costs. That makes it a really positive outlook for Arkansas techies, maybe a little less so for us in San Jose. I'm sure there are special cases and vanity teams, and culture moves slowly sometimes, but if things truly spread across so will the comp.
At least one lawsuit has already been filed[0] with most likely more coming. I really don't see how Robin Hood can spin this in their favor, or recover from this from a PR standpoint.

[0] https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.553175...
Super interesting! More evidence that cities are here to stay.
> So - why would they stop?

There is literally no evidence that Citadel has stopped serving GME orders. That is entirely the conjecture of this thread and ignores the much more likelier option that it was Robinhood that limited the stocks.

Why wouldn't you short GME after the price has risen so high? I'm sure there are plenty of hedge funds shorting now at a much higher price.

Hell, I shorted AMC yesterday and have made quite a bit off of that already.
New feature in iOS14 makes developers ask permission to users
This looks ugly but how do we trust the anonymous Redditor who is claiming to be Robinhood employee.
>The new way is you give them your credit card or WeChat 'bill me' code. You get billed whatever the merchant wants to bill. Any post-facto complaint will be at the cost of your own time.

Sure, that may be the "new" way, but that doesn't mean it's better! Much of the payment fraud online couldn't exist if customers were in control of how much money to send and when rather than the merchant.

>Under Windows, AFAIK most programs have a partially restricted permission set, hence Run as administrator. In Linux, under modern distributions, most programs run in both a user and a cgroup context, and some under further restrictions such as chroot and caps.

Under normal circumstances, they're restricted only to the extent that your user is restricted. That's far from the level of granularity that GP is talking about.
Thanks for your thoughts.

The post explicitly says that assessment (comprehension with the purpose of making a decision about a situation around a system) is not reading. However, it does says that people currently conflate the two because nobody talks about them to the point that reading is a proxy to measure comprehension effort.

You are correct in saying that I argue that it is not appropriate to employ reading as a main means for assessment.

Code is certainly not literature, but it should still be studied. In fact, assessment specifically talks about the intent. If the intent is different, such as learn a new language, reading is appropriate. Reading is also appropriate when the problem fits on one screen. It starts to be inappropriate as soon as you start to scroll.

I also do not say that tools should be limited to code either. Every aspect of a system, including its history, runtime, tickets, customer feedback, is data, and it's all relevant. We should be easily able to integrate any of these in our reasoning.

I agree with the observation that code can vary greatly. In fact, it is for very reason that out-of-the-box-clicking-tools will always fail to provide meaningful value. They bake the question in the click, but because of context is unpredictable, we simply do not know the question before we have the problem. That is why the specific tool we'd need should come after the problem, not before it.

And yes, a system is a phenomena that should be approached through the scientific method (this is the essence of what moldable development is). Developers are already doing that implicitly. We should just make it explicit. All sorts of possibilities will arise after that.
This seems pretty speculative and a huge risk for Citadel as an institution.

I think most of their profit is coming from volume as a market maker. They capture small dollars on the bid/ask spread.

Will be interesting to see the fallout if the SEC digs in more. But I would take this with a grain of salt.
They did shut down margin trading in GME and others several days ago, this is a further step atop it.
I think that both things can be true: people are going to get screwed, and fiddling with the rules in the middle of the game is a really bad look.
> I've configured my router to force all UDP port 53 traffic to my Pi-Hole

Oh wow, how do you do that?
Regular people are too dumb to play with big risk, including you and me. There's a reason why most countries have a very tight control of gambling places, and that's not because they're classists. When gambling is allowed, the whole society suffers, because there will be a few lucky winners and many who just lost their life savings, and they still have to eat (and their families have to eat) so someone's tax payment is going to pay for them.

I agree that it's a problem when "too big to fail" players get away with their shenanigans, but that's a separate problem, and you don't solve that problem by encouraging common folks to gamble away their wealth.
Because they know that the market price is _actually_ $9.93, but that just hasn't reached everyone yet, hence the "high frequency" in "high frequency trading".
That is so messed up, and that’s unfortunately how the whole world works. People in power will never give it up willingly.
The point is the demand still vastly exceeds the supply.
Yeah but not all of them are selling order flow. E.g. Vanguard and Fidelity don't sell order flow and haven't blocked purchases of these stocks. They make their money the same way banks do.
This is one reason I go out of my way to divide functions between those that return something and those that do something. In JS I use class methods as a shorthand for the latter: "this will probably mutate something". Plain functions, then, are relatively safe to treat as pure/remove if their return value isn't used.
The: Placeholder CSS Pseudo-Element
Represents the placeholder text in an input or textarea element.
Nobody needs to "force" anyone to do anything. Money works great as a motivator.
This is assuming, your interviewer will be your teammate after joining the company.
I'm taking it with a huge grain of salt and doubt it happened. But... assumming it did... calling brokerage firms to stop buy orders from retail investors so you can drive down the price of stock? If that isn't illegal what the fuck is?
GameStop Short Sell Firm Citadel Paid Biden’s Treasury Secretary Millions
There are some people who cannot work from home. These people have been especially vocal. Sometimes they include people who have kids, other times they include people who get their social interaction in at work. I think the office should accommodate them as well as remote workers.

The biggest challenge I've faced being on a remote team (read: not necessarily WFH) is that people who are at the primary physical location are acutely unaware of their remote colleagues. On VCS systems they'll shout and have conversations with each other, they won't focus conversations in chat or make equivalent channels for hallway conversations, and they'll assign work to themselves first.

I'd like to have the option for remote work to be available to me in the future and if we're going to do that then that means people who go into primary locations must learn to play ball with everyone.
I do not think that. Do not put words in my mouth.

Anyway, the sibling comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25946537 is right.
My company has already said that we will never be a remote working company after the pandemic is over (we have all been working remote since last March and they are saying that it probably wont be until August or September that we move back to campus). I think most of that is because the company just finished building 2 million square feet of additional office space on campus just before the pandemic.
In all honesty, happy that he is around and able to run his business somewhat freely. It is still pretty good. There were rumors of his well-being a few months back.

One may argue that he decided to stand down and bow to all demands, no arguments. Otherwise, it might have been even worse.

China is not USA. Both have pros and cons.
The big short was the same thing. The VW short squeeze too. This is nothing new. The fix is to just close your short position.
Robinhood is automatically selling users shares
https://twitter.com/555Sunny/status/1354854993946406917?s=20
> This isn't even remotely a representative sentiment of the 70+ million people that are not on the "left".

Probably not, but it’s a pretty accurate summary of their leadership.

The facts are the 45 and the Republicans attempted to throw out the results of an election.

You can argue that most people on the right do not agree with this, but they should really stop voting for these people then.
From what I can tell, IB seems to have initially blocked just trading on margin. Which makes sense, given the extreme volatility of the collateral.

But then shortly later, they set to liquidation only. I’d guesstimate that 80%+ of IBs customer base trades with leverage. So, I’d bet that their internal systems had no reliable to block margin trading, but allow unleveraged positions
Traderepublic is doing the same
If this is true than people will likely go to jail. The images of Ken Griffin being arrested outside his $230 million penthouse because of some redditors trolling will be quite the scene.
Please stop spreading this meme. If you're actually curious about the role HFT plays in price enhancement for retail trading, check out Matt Levine under section "Robinhood".

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-10-16/carl-i...
Sorry that was ambiguously worded. My point was that nothing like the CWA was even floated afterwards, since everyone knows the politics of today wouldn't allow it.
Lots of individual retail investors, including myself, take short positions on a regular basis. People keep saying that all the short positions are held by hedge funds, but in reality there's a lot of individual investors that have short positions too.

The risk to a company that processes trades is that many of these retail investors accounts would turn negative and the company that processes the trades would take giant losses they did not plan for. To prevent that, they stop processing trades.
But now you can just run app in your desktop with one click, you dont have to build appstore app from sources right?

Im talking about dumb task of running software, not developing new software where I totally agree with your point.
> rich district school computers (in the '70s)

Gates went to Lakeside, often considered the top private school in Washington state.
that was helpful
>Because, Since I was young, I've been hammering a cinderblock away that can grow 3 new heads at random intervals

English is my first language and I still have no idea what this means?
It'll be all brokers who use Citadel for liquidity - I'm blocked on several major brand-name brokerages. I don't have a position in GME, but i can only route "closing" orders - no opens.
Knock, knock. Who's there? NAT. Nat who? A NAT URL-borne killer
To the two downvoters , this is 1h after I wrote the comment: https://twitter.com/justinkan/status/1354853920762253315
Which new feature? I should probably know what people are appreciating :)
Or creating an alternative exchange in which HFT is not allowed.
I am curious about holding GME. Is your plan to keep it long term? If not what are you plans to unwind your positions? Certain price point? Certain time frame?
"Melvin Capital has repositioned our portfolio over the past few days. We have closed out our position in GME (GameStop)"

You recall incorrectly. I encourage you to Google before commenting your recollections, it's quite easy to find.
Can you google the course web page? Most of mine are public and include the textbooks
Obviously it should be illegal to lend the same shares out multiple rounds. If it's not, that's an absurd hole in the regulation.

A owns 90 shares, B owns 10. A lends 90 shares to C who sells them to D. D lends 90 shares to C who sells them to E. E lends 90 shares to C who sells them to F...

C in this hypothetical is borrowing and selling the same shares over and over again to various 3rd parties. Shorting the same shares twice is truly naked short selling.

If there's three people in a room, and only one pair of pants, what would you call it?
But it must be possible to build an app which serves retailers as the customers vs these HFTs? For example, charging monthly subscription or paying micro fees per trade. What are the costs involved for trading directly in exchanges?
Clearly this arrangement only benefits short sellers.
I remember reading this years ago, I think it was my first encounter with the "... fierce passion of a thousand suns".

It still made me chuckle even today, thanks for sharing it.
I'm not arguing either of those (and wholeheartedly agree with you). I'm simply stating a potential concern/justification that Robinhood may have or use.
There are some pretty strong assertions in your comment that I'm not convinced we actually know the answer too yet. I've seen senior people talking about "manageable productivity drops" more than "no difference", or "even better" but of course sampling bias applies.

But also, there is a potential semantic difficulty. By remote friendly I am thinking about "open to hiring a single person in a different city/country", not "employees that don't come into the office much".

I would draw a distinction between those, and I'm not convinced we'll see a huge shift in the former.
This is why our tools for Open Software need to be Open themselves.

Have a problem being unable to disable PRs? A PR that fixes it would be embarassing for Github if it were simply Closed. How many such PRs for distinct code could we get submitted at once?
We're suggesting ulterior motive in Robinhood shutting down GME trading. GME has caused Citadel tremendous risks/losses. Citadel loaned $2.75 billion to Melvin before Melvin liquidated over GME.

Maybe Citadel's updated their position but I think it's still shorter-term bearish.
I'm not talking about a zillion protocols with discoverable services, but of a single language of the internet that allows service discoverability and concept sharing dynamically between peers.
That would be right if we were talking about a trading platform, but what we are actually talking about is a brokerage. A brokerage places orders on trading platforms on behalf of its customers and brokerages can make various rules about the orders they will or will not place. For example, Robinhood has restricted trading of box spreads for quite a while following an incident of attempted fraud on their platform (which was partially their fault to begin with). Brokerages also have leeway to stop potential crimes they observe their customers committing, which is what happened here.

For what it's worth, Robinhood was not the only brokerage that is restricting trading GME. TD Ameritrade, Interactive Brokers, and WeBull also have restrictions in place right now.
That's cool, it's your preference. A lot of people prefer going in, especially if they are single and live alone.
> you are taking a risk and there is a possibility to lose in the worst possible way. Call it games, YOLO or hedge better than competitors.

Sure, there is some risk in liquidity provisioning, but I think you are really not understanding what market makers do and conflating it with hedge funds.
Not sure I agree. The attention their shady business model is getting now is not something they would've liked. I'm also not sure what it means to their user growth. One one hand they are getting a lot of press which can help them gain more users. On the other hand, the press they are getting is not positive and their app ratings are going down (Google/Apple would likely give them some protection but they cannot block negative ratings forever). If many traders start migrating to other trading solutions it can have a snowball effect.
Meanwhile, decentralized platforms exist and sites like localbtc exist where I can just buy and sell from private parties.